Performance Testing article

[oakview]

In my issue of Livestock Plus that came yesterday, there is an interesting article entitled "The Start of a New Era of Cattle Improvement-Performance Testing."  The article extolled the virtues of testing cattle for weaning weight, ADG, etc., and the effect it would have on herd profitability.  Things we have all heard before.  I scanned the article and soon became somewhat bored.  I've heard all this before.  We got our first registered Shorthorns in 1964.  I've seen all this propaganda.  I've read "The Banker and the Bull."  I've looked at "How much is a Good Bull Worth."  Then I noticed the date of the article.  It was written in 1957, purblished in the "Iowa Agriculturalist."  That started me thinking.  I wonder how many cattle producers today actually performance test.  I would guess the number is surprisingly low.  There may be a few more than 50 years ago, but I'll bet the number that actually weigh their calves at birth and weaning, test for ADG, etc., is not high.  I know of areas where the vast majority of the bulls are purchased at the sale barn for two reasons:  They're cheap and they're black.  Nothing more.  I keep hearing my Canadian friends talking about the number of bulls they are selling to commercial producers, at very good prices I might add.  I hear about the Canadian Shorthorn cross calves that sell at an equal or even higher prices than their black counterparts.  Many of these cattle probably end up in the same western feedlots that the black cattle around here that sell for 10-20 cents more per pound than the "colored" ones go.  I would wager that the number of Steer Planet enthusiasts that actually do much of any performance testing would be low.  It would be interesting to know what level of performance testing, if any, people do. 

 

[diamonddls]

For a long time we never kept records of any weights then eventually started using the tape method on our registerable calves. The last year we have began keeping bw and we on all our calves both commercial and pb. We have a spring scale to weigh the babies and a digital platform at weaning and yearling. We have incorporated the platform scale with our handling system so it has become routine to catch weights every time we work an anal. It's helped us already identify which of our herd bulls our more consistant in certain areas. We are also hoping it helps us in the culling process of cows over the next few years to identify which cow families are producing both consistently and near the top of the herd. We are relatively new to this process but feel its the right choice for us as our cattle are more commercially focused.

 

[aj]

There are big commercial......cow calf herds....that keep better performance records than the purebred guys. They cull poor performers.....I think they really tighten quality in a hurry. I saw some steer calves run through the salebarn the other day.....80 steers....UNIFORM.......looked like they were all born on the same day. Amazing cattle......I think they were around 700 pounds.

 

[justintime]

I agree with oakview that it seems that there are probably fewer purebred breeders performance testing now than in the 50s and 60s. Here in Saskatchewan, our department of agriculture developed a program that ran for many years, where they hired people to drive around the province and weigh calves at weaning and at a year. I did this for a few years right out of high school. We hauled a portable scale to each farm and weighed all the calves. After weighing we sat down with the owner and divided the calves into management groups and then sent the weights in to be processed. After about 25 years, the ag department decided that most breed associations were taking over this job so they quit doing it. Many of the breeds in that day, required performance records in order to register calves.
I continued to weigh my calves after the program stopped, but it was mainly for my own use. We have been performance testing all our bull calves for the past 10 years and weigh them every month. I find this to be very interesting to watch them develop from weaning to yearling and to compare different bloodlines for growth as well as various other traits. It is from my own performance records, that I have saw some trends that I think are important. Firstly, that a low BW is not the total answer to your problems. I am a firm believer that calving ease is more important that birth weight. In performance testing over 400 bulls from our herd, I have never had a bull with a BW in the bottom 50% of the calf crop index over 100 for growth after weaning. Not a single one. I do not keep any bulls for breeding purposes that required assistance at birth other than if it was a minor malpresentation issue, or if they were over 110 lbs at birth. I think it is possible to select for unassisted births and still maintain adequate growth. I also think selecting herd bulls for several years for low BW can create other problems in your herd such as smaller pelvic size which creates a situation where females have problems calving a normal sized calf.
I have also found that not all cattlemen want the performance data on the bulls, but more and more are demanding it. We post the weights of our bulls on our website for 3 months before our March bull sale, and I am finding more people seem to be following this data every year.

 

[scotland]

performance testing and ultrasound carcass/bfat should be mandatory for every bull sold for breeding. The color of the cattle would be drastically changed... science doesnt know propaganda... One noticeable measure is the EYE scale!